BASHIR AHMAD vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by Bashir Ahmad, who was accused in a criminal case registered under Section 324 and Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following the death of the injured party. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who was alleged to have caused only a simple injury with a Sota and was declared innocent by the investigating agencies, was entitled to bail despite the main accused remaining at large. The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail, noting that the fatal shot was attributed to a co-accused and that the petitioner had been found innocent during the investigation. The Court emphasized that the petitioner could not be kept in jail as a hostage for the absconding co-accused. The key principle laid down is that where the allegations against an accused require further inquiry and the accused has been exonerated by the investigating officer, the case falls within the ambit of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, warranting the grant of bail.
- Does the fact that the main accused are absconding justify the denial of bail to a co-accused who has been declared innocent by the police?
- Can an accused be denied bail solely to be held as a hostage for the arrest of other absconding co-accused?
- Does a case fall within the ambit of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when the investigating officer has found the accused innocent?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Bashir Ahmad, petitioner, has sought his post-arrest bail through the present petition in a case F.I.R. No,149 of 2000, dated 31-5-2000, Police Station Fazilpur, District Rajanpur, on the statement of one Muhammad Nadeem son of Ghulam Qadir. Initially the case was registered under section 324 read with section 34, P.P.C. And after the death of the injured section 302, P.P.C. Was added on 5-6- 2000.
2. The relevant facts as alleged in the F.I.R. Are that on the fateful day Riaz Ahmad armed with pistol .12 bore, Ijaz Ahmad armed with pistol .30 bore (both sons of Ghulam Nabi) and Bashir Ahmad (petitioner, armed with Sota came across the deceased Muhammad Tasleem. Riaz Ahmad raised lalkara and also fatally fired at him. The allegation against the petitioner is that he caused simple injury on the shoulder of the deceased with his Sota. The petitioner was arrested on 17-7-2000 and since his bail was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rajanpur, vide order, dated 15-2-2001, he is behind the bars.
3. I have gone through the record through the valuable assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Khan Atta Ullah Khan Tareen, Advocate; the learned counsel for the State.
4. It is conceded that fatal shot is attributed to Riaz Ahmad, who also raised Lalkara. Similarly it has also been admitted that Riaz Ahmad and Ijaz Ahmad are real maternal nephews of the petitioner, Bashir Ahmad. It has also been admitted that there was only, a bruise on the person of the deceased and no recovery had been effected from the petitioner. He was found innocent by the Investigating Officer and also by the D.S.P.
5. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail on the ground that main accused who are relatives of the petitioner are still at large and there is a strong apprehension of petitioner's absconsion.
6. Needless to say that the petitioner cannot be kept as hostage in the jail. The allegation levelled against the petitioner needs further probe and his case falls within the ambit of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, I am inclined to release him on bail, subject to his tendering bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (two lacs), with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Judge.